Rhythmic context modulates foreperiod effects

Abstract

2274Preparing for a future event involves expectations about both the what and the when of that event. In the present study, we considered two very different perspectives on the role of temporal contexts in eliciting such preparatory expectations. A classic view derives from the foreperiod (FP) literature, in which responses to single time intervals have been studied. Different FP paradigms permit examination of the relationship between probabilistic uncertainty and reaction time (RT). A common assumption is that low uncertainty about the what and when of a forthcoming time interval, conferred probabilistically by prior trial context, facilitates preparatory activity. A different perspective derives from research on sequence perception. It is concentrated on relational (rather than probabilistic) properties of time intervals within sequences that facilitate preparation of forthcoming time intervals.In the present study, we outline contrasting hypotheses about the role of temporal context that emerge from these two perspectives. To evaluate these hypotheses, we modified a standard FP paradigm by incorporating each of three FPs (250, 500, and 1,000 msec) as the final time interval of rhythmical auditory patterns that varied in degree of temporal coherence. Uncertainties in FP ContextsClassically, temporal preparation for a forthcoming target event has been studied by varying the duration of a single time interval (i.e., an FP) that occurs between a warning signal and a target on each of a series of trials. 1 Faster RTs to the target presumably indicate better temporal preparation to a particular FP. Conventionally, an RT to a given FP depends on two features: FP duration and the intertrial context in which the FP occurs (e.g., Niemi & Näätänen, 1981).Intertrial (or global) context differentiates the two major paradigms used to study temporal preparation: In a variable-FP design, FPs vary from trial to trial within a block; in a constant-FP design, a single FP is used within a trial block. In the variable-FP paradigm, the probability distribution of FPs over trials is assumed to determine the uncertainty of an FP on an individual trial. In the simplest case, a uniform probability distribution of different FPs typically yields RTs that get shorter as an FP lengthens: a decreasing RT-FP function. The most parsimonious explanation for this function is that uncertainty decreases as time elapses from a warning signal, and this decreased uncertainty results in shorter RTs to longer FPs (e.g., Klemmer, 1956;Niemi & Näätänen, 1981;Woodrow, 1914). A flat RT-FP function is also consistent with a uniform FP distribution, but suggests that the subjects acquired little knowledge of FPs from the global context-that is, that uncertainty was uniformly high for all FPs.The constant-FP paradigm yields an RT-FP function that is characteristically different from that of variable-FP profiles, with RTs lengthening as FP lengthens. Such ascending RT-FP profiles are attributed to subjects' reduced abilities to estimate longer (albeit pred...

Response specific temporal expectancy: Evidence from a variable foreperiod paradigm

“…Error bars represent ±1 SE. The means are displayed separately for each analyzed block of the experiment variable-FP effect for randomly distributed sequence-final FPs (Ellis & Jones, 2010;Sanabria, Capizzi, & Correa, 2011). However, whether rhythm also interacts with specific temporal expectancy in a sequence-final FP has not been tested.…”

“…In order to isolate the effects of temporal expectancy on response performance from any effects of event expectancy, imperative stimuli have always been balanced across FPs (Cardoso-Leite et al, 2009;Ellis & Jones, 2010;Los & Schut, 2008;Niemi & Näätänen, 1981;Pecenka & Keller, 2009). In such situations, participants can anticipate when an imperative stimulus will appear, but not which stimulus will appear (given that there are several options).…”

Rhythm sensitivity in macaque monkeys

“…Concomitant with these operations, sensory processing and speed of perception are selectively facilitated for stimuli that are concurrent with the regular temporal grid. This perceptual facilitation is reflected in improved discrimination of pitch (Jones et al, 2002), intensity (Geiser et al, 2012), and temporal cues (Barnes and Jones, 2000; Correa et al, 2006; McAuley and Miller, 2007; Ellis and Jones, 2010; Sanabria et al, 2011; Rohenkohl et al, 2012). Temporal regularities also facilitate auditory stream formation if frequency cues are insufficient, or stabilize streams once they have been formed (Bendixen et al, 2010; Andreou et al, 2011).…”

The Role of Native Language and the Fundamental Design of the Auditory System in Detecting Rhythm Changes

“…Regularity also allows predicting the onset of the following vowels, and a rhythm change is detected when this prediction is not met. Rhythms characterized by a higher degree of F o r P e e r R e v i e w stress-timing make it difficult to build expectations of when the next beat should happen, and this uncertainty leads to poorer preparation and slower responding (Ellis & Jones, 2010). McAuley and Fromboluti (2015) showed that variability in the timing of tones weakens the onset timing effect, leads to distortions in perception of tone durations, and undermines attentional entrainment.…”